Recently Updated

Home

1. Call to Order. The regular meeting of the Council of the City of Rogers was called to order by Mayor Bunting on Tuesday, December 10, 2013 at 7:00 p.m. at Rogers Community Center, 21201 Memorial Drive, Rogers, MN, 55374.

3. PresentationsMayor Bunting recognized a large scout troop who are attending the meeting.

4. Approve AgendaThe agenda was set as submitted.

5. Consent Agenda5.01 Approval of Minutes from November 26, 2013 Work Session and November 26, 2013 City Council Meeting5.02 Approval of Bills and Claims5.03 Amendment to the Planning Commission Terms and Appointments Policy5.04 Approval of Resolution No. 2013-81, A Resolution Denying Final Development Plan for First National Bank at Diamond Pointe of Rogers5.05 Approval of Resolution No. 2013-82, A Resolution Changing Name of a Portion of Prairieview Drive to Prairieview Drive South5.06 RW&S Employee Recognition Program:• Chris Mirazita• Karen Mirazita and Kim Kolstad5.07 Approval of Resolution No. 2013-83, A Resolution Approving the Recording of Conservation Easement for Wetland Bank Purpose5.08 Hennepin County Cooperative Agreement for Traffic Signal Maintenance and Operation5.09 Authorization for Request for Proposal for Construction Manager at Risk Professional Services5.10 2014 Hennepin County Electronic Proprietary Data Base Contract Renewal5.11 Approval of 2014 Fee Schedule, RAC Advertising Schedule and Utility Rates:• Ordinance No. 2013-18, An Ordinance Adopting the 2014 Master Fee Schedule for the City of Rogers and Summary Ordinance No. 2013-18.• Ordinance No. 2013-19, An Ordinance Establishing Utility Rates for Sanitary Sewer, Water and Storm Water Within the City of Rogers and Summary Ordinance No. 2013-195.12 Canceling the Dec. 23, 2013 City Council MeetingIhli moved, Jakel seconded a motion to approve the consent agenda. Motion carried 5-0.

6. Public Hearings6.01 Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of a Five Year Capital Improvement Plan (2014 to 2018) and Notice of intention to Issue Capital Improvement Bonds and Equipment Debt as $3,465,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2014AWieland addressed the Council regarding the CIP and Notice of intent to issue $3,465,000 general obligation bonds. Wieland also introduced financial advisor Jason Aarsvold.Wieland read from her memo provided to Council highlighting the following:• Police Department building needs• Cost effective solution to provide a new police department• Purchase existing building as the most cost effective solution• Items included in CIP for this purpose; buildings only not capital equipment• No other capital improvement buildings listed in the next five years

$2.5 Million of the general obligation bonds would be used toward the build-out of the police station building.

Wieland proceeded through the eight factors the Council takes into consideration with approval of the CIP:1. Condition of the City's existing infrastructure, including projected need for repair or replacement.2. Likely demand for the improvement.3. Estimated cost of the improvement.4. Available public resources.5. Level of overlapping debt in the City.6. Relative benefits and costs of alternative uses of funds.7. Operating costs of the proposed improvements.8. Alternatives for providing services most efficiently through shared

Mayor Bunting opened the meeting for public comment at 7:16 p.m.

Gregg Peppin, 14535 Edgewood RoadMr. Peppin addressed the Council stating Ms. Wieland whipped through this rather fast. As told by Mr. Kelly, there has been little discussion about a new police department at Council meetings. How many times has it been on the agenda for discussion?

Bunting stated he doesn't know the number of times, but it has been discussed at open meetings a significant number of times, tours of the building have been taken by the public safety task force, and multiple work sessions starting 6 to 9 months ago.

Gregg Peppin: At Council work sessions not just public safety meetings?Bunting stated yes – generally at 5:30/6:00 the same night as a Council meeting.

Gregg Peppin: Is it your intent to vote to approve this tonight with the sale of the bonds? I want to clarify that with your affirmative vote, the ground breaking will happen.

Bunting, yes it is our intention to approve this tonight - unanimous consensus to move forward with the purchase of the building.

Gregg Peppin: There was a statement made that this will fit the department for 20 to 30 years, is that correct.Bunting stated yes.

Gregg Peppin what is the capacity of the new building, how many officers does it have the capacity to service?Beahen stated 42 officers.

Gregg Peppin asked how many there are currently. Beahen stated 16.

Gregg Peppin: It was made known via the initial the preliminary levy that $600,000 was put in a sinking fund for a Police Department. Or for future construction of the police department. I'm assuming that money will be drawn from that money?

Bunting you are referring to all sinking funds - we have various funds for roads, technology, etc.

Gregg Peppin stated he is referring to the September 21st article on the preliminary levy where Mr. Stahmer stated $614,000 of the levy is for sinking funds. Is that entire $614,000 to be attributed to the new police department? Peppin asked for a breakdown.

Gregg Peppin asked when the total completion of the building is done, what is the cost?

Wieland and Council stated we are borrowing $2.5 million plus the original $920,000 for a total of $3.465 million of which $100,000 is for the fire station/EOC.

Gregg Peppin stated he is opposed to the project at this particular time, when we are asking tax payers for a significant increase in taxes, he would really like to see some discussion about consolidation or sharing of services; if each City in our region continues to build bricks and mortar and we never look at consolidating services. Rogers is the city of 11,000 people and we will have the capacity for 42 officers. That's a lot of capacity and a lot of tax dollars and I shudder to think of what future Councils may be obligated as that building fills up with more and more people and urge you caution and strongly suggest a no vote.

Seth Carnes, 13835 Golden Eye WayClarifying question; when was the application for the bond first submitted to the state? I'm not particularly familiar with process. Been trying to read minutes on this issue.

Stahmer stated he may be mixing together two separate issues. Stahmer stated that we originally applied for state bonding bill for a $5 Million project which was to add on to this existing building. Stahmer stated there were issues with that project; one of them being cost. That was a high dollar project. Subsequent to that bonding bill application, which is still alive until the Council moves forward, but right now the project as conceived does not include building onto this station. Stahmer explained how we are moving forward with $3.4 Million project with an existing building. Stahmer stated capital improvement plans previously showed $6.5 Million to $9 Million for a new police station, now down to $3.4 Million. Stahmer stated the bond discussed tonight is separate from state bonding bill application. This would be the City issuing bonds to do this project as it relates to a police building.

Bunting stated to build on to that, we first looked at adding onto this building which would have eliminated the community room we are in right now. Had we gone that route we would have needed to invest another $800,000 to $1 Million to another facility for community meeting space.

Carnes: Anecdotal based on what you said, but reading through minutes trying to refresh myself on the issue, it appeared the application, which may be void, was submitted prior to the council adopting the application according to the minutes. The application was submitted because of a deadline.

Stahmer stated the process allowed for the application to be submitted, but in order for it to be formalized, it needed council resolution. It was submitted because of a deadline.

Carnes: There may be process issues at play, the point is it appeared from minutes that a decision was made behind the scenes.

Stahmer stated staff submitted the application and that Council could have pulled back the application if it was not supported.

Carnes: One thing I want clarification is as we are going through bullet points on why the new building is necessary; one thing to express to the community that there is a need and another to spell out what the needs are arrive at that conclusion. I haven't got a good sense of the need. What specifically are we losing out as a community because of this deficient police department and lack of EOC?

Bunting stated Chief can answer this the best. Bunting stated he usually asks people if they have actually been in the building and seen it. The south end of building is uninhabitable because of mold issues. The center portion where the garage is – open space recently upgraded with evidence room. That portion which is where you would normally see things such as holding cells that we don't have, lack of climate controlled evidence room. We actually don't have many things that are required of a police department. Then in the main part (old City Hall) there are problems with floors caving in, foundation moving, rodents, and basement flooding. We have taken steps to try to correct these, but as said in the past, we are putting lipstick on a pig. Spending hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to maintain this building which is literally falling apart. It's an issue from a standards standpoint as far as the state is concerned and an issue for moral. Most people wouldn't work in this type of facility. Bunting compared it to putting a new roof on a house, at some point you need to bite the bullet and do it. We are spending 50% less by moving into an existing building. Bunting spoke on having an EOC and stated we are a primary center should there be a nuclear mishap at the Monticello plant. Bunting stated Elk River just used their EOC extensively with a missing child incident. Bunting talked about outfitting the community room into an EOC. Council and staff have gone to great lengths to reduce the impact to the citizens while maintaining minimum standards and giving our officers the tools they need. With the addition of Chief Beahen we have gotten insight of exactly what is being asked of our department. We are blessed with the location of businesses because of the major roadways, but with that also come responsibilities. We have a great deal of theft, auto accidents. We have been able to start documenting police calls, we finally know what we are doing as a police department. We have the call volume of cities twice our size. What we are asking of our officers is a great deal. Going forward, as we grow as a city, likely adding over 500 new residents this year alone. Industrial and commercial business envy of cities that have populations of 25,000 to 30,000 residents.

Carnes: So you fully expect to reach the capacity of 42 officers?

Bunting, not next year, not next decade, but within 30 years we will be at a population base where that building will be maxed out.

Stahmer by 2040 are looking at a population of 25,000 to 30,000. Preliminary Met Council forecast.

Bunting, asked Chief Beahen to add on to whatever is said.

Carnes; Appreciates that the Council has given more substance but do we need a building that is 50% larger by capacity right away? It seems like a big increase in the size of the building and the debt we take on and the taxes we are required to pay.

Bunting, this would be a good time for the Chief to talk about things that will be in this building that we currently don't have.

Carnes: What are we considering cutting in place of it? If you see a pressing need, then you need to prioritize. There are plenty of areas in the budget that can be sacrificed for things such as parks. Is the Council looking at that?

Bunting, there are many areas of the budget that we can dive into; but with parks and trails we do have a park board that reviews the needs similar to planning commission and brings items forward to the Council. It is difficult in a growing community especially one with a young population. There is only one other community in all of Hennepin County that has as many children as Rogers. Makes it difficult when looking at things like parks and trails, summer programs, ice arena; they use up a significant portion of our budget. The demand that is placed on the City with the population we have is a little bit unique and limits what we can cut back. We look for efficiencies; what can we do - what can we do better. Peppin brought up sharing services. We do that, we do equipment sharing with other communities. We do fire service for Corcoran, we are starting discussions on a fire district which would provide service to multiple cities – but once that happens, it is no longer a City department. Those things don't happen overnight, at a minimum it happens over a period of five years. There are a lot of difficult questions that need to be asked with that. We try to look into those things as much as possible. In the past things we cut such as yard waste recycling, we did cut that but brought it back with permits. With a growing City it is difficult to eliminate or cut services. We are growing by 5% of the population.

Carnes: would have to grow government services at a slower pace. I have never moved into a neighborhood because of parks or government services. The number one factor for me is how much I am going to have to spend to live there. Talking about decreasing taxpayer burden.

Stahmer - we will discussed services and cost under 7.02.

Carnes: encourage to rethink demand for government service and what that looks like. If we have a rising population, and more tax base, but I am a tax payer who is comfortable with slow growth. Spoke on maintaining citizen confidence.

Chief Beahen, one thing to do is to reiterate what was discussed at public safety task force$90,000 being withdrawn to be used bond payment in addition to the LGA money received for a total around $180,000. The bond payment on the building will be $144,000; we will be $40,000 ahead. It looks like there is an impact to the taxpayer, we are actually money ahead. My point is there really isn't an impact to the taxpayer, we now have another $40,000 that we are going to offset the budget. What is more important is the safety and legal issues we are dealing with in the building. Beahen spoke on a recent incident were six prisoners were handcuffed to chairs in the kitchen. There are no holding cells. We are looking at creating a regional booking area in the new building. Offices for Sheriffs, State Patrol, and Regional Booking. We are working with Corcoran, Dayton and surrounding departments to create regional facility. We will also be offering fingerprint services.

The evidence room is not only deficient, doesn't have alarm system, none of the department is alarmed and it can't be – it's too old. The state auditor has principals for monitoring are deficient. Lastly, the building is scheduled to hold 42 officers. However, there are four officers to a cubicle – we won't be adding space or creating new space. We are being fiscally responsible. Beahen spoke on his experience in Elk River in the building of police facilities. Spending $3.4m that will take care of the City for the next 30 years. Beahen spoke on the costs of other police facilities that are being built stating we are doing ours at one-fourth the average cost of what a normal department is doing.

Beahen then spoke on the lack of a generator and internal radio system. If we had a storm, we would not be able to operate. Currently there are four buildings with four hvac systems.

Jim Kelly: Are the other tenants going to contribute financially to the building? Beahen stated it comes in terms of services, it's a handshake with those entities – they will be in our community and able to assist our department.

Kelly: Is there room left over for other activities or events to be rented? Beahen, there may be a small room available, but it is difficult to get into the rental business.

Beahen then offered to take anyone through the building. He stated there will be nine offices built out. We will have interview rooms and recoding capabilities; both audio and video.We would need to put $750,000 to $1M to bring our current building up to standard.

Beahen provided statistics of the number of calls for services compared to Elk River.

Beahen provided examples of inefficient services with the old department.

Peppin: I would never want to second guess the Chief's professional judgment. With the move to the new building, is the old building going to go back on the tax rolls? What is the plan for the old building?

Bunting stated we may tear down the old police portion and possibly the garage area, and at that point decide what we want to do with the rest. We can possibly use the good part of the building as a senior center, but we don't want to speak for future councils. Can't tell you yet what we are going to do, we haven't decided.

Peppin: To answer the question from earlier, I haven't seen the building. I'm not suggesting the Council hasn't been transparent on this, I would subscribe to a different level of transparency. But, this is 50% of the levy of $6.6 million – that is a lot of money. Peppin asked the Chief if he has considered having an open house. Peppin referred to Hassan Hillbillies - invite them to come and see the crappy building. Peppin stated that the City should get money out of the state patrol for their use of the building; they would do the same to us.

Bunting stated we talked about having open houses. We didn't realize a building that would come at such a low price was going to come through. We were discussing open houses when we thought we were going to expand the community room building. Bunting spoke on a birthday party group that visited the police department.

Bunting stated we wanted to do an open house. In regard to transparency, this was discussed at multiple work sessions and meetings. We can only go so far in being transparent. It takes some responsibility to get themselves informed.

Bunting continued to speak on the ways people can get themselves informed. There is more transparency with this Council that there ever has been.

Bunting invited anyone else forward.

Ihli moved, Stanley seconded a motion to close the public hearing at 7:58 p.m. Motion carried 5-0.

7. General Business7.01 Adoption of a Five Year Capital Improvement Plan (2014 to 2018) and Notice of intention to Issue Capital Improvement Bonds and Equipment Debt as $3,465,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2014A (Resolutions 2013-84 and 2013-85)Finance Director Wieland spoke on the two other components to the bonds; the fire department heavy utility truck and the equipment certificate list.

Wieland provided background on the authorization to order the utility truck and the financing sources for the truck.

Wieland also provided background on the equipment certificate component of the bond.

Wieland also spoke on the philosophy of the capital equipment funds in the budget.

Jason Aarsvold went through presale information. Aarsvold stated the proposed bonds are a 20 year term with the equipment portion paid off in five years. He stated the bonds are set up with a 10 year call feature and stated they are bank qualified bonds. The bond will be rated through Moody's with a rating call. Currently the City is rated at Aa2. They will be sold through competitive sale to receive the best interest rate possible.

Aarsvold asked for questions from the Council.

Wieland stated at this time what staff is requesting Council to adopt two resolutions; Resolutions 2013-84 and 2013-85.

Bunting offered the meeting to be open to the public because of the wording in the agenda.

7.02 Approval of 2014 Final Budget and Levy Certification• Open for public comment• Approval of Resolution No. 2013-86, A Resolution Setting the 2014 General and Special LeviesWieland introduced the budget presentation. Wieland reviewed the memo included in the packet reading the following:"The City is required to review the proposed budget and levy at a regular City Council Meeting (formerly called Truth-in-Taxation Hearing) and allow public testimony. The budget is considered "balanced", with overall General Fund & Rogers Activity Center (Ice Arena) budgeted revenues, other financing sources totaling $7,472,435, or a 6.08% increase over the 2013 General Fund and Special Revenue Fund (RAC) Budgets. The proposed budgeted expenditures consist of General Fund Budget $6,484,685, Rogers Activity Center (RAC) Special Revenue Fund Budget $542,350 and RAC Other Financing Uses Budget $445,400 totaling $7,472,435. In addition, the City is proposing to continue levying for future funding of Capital Projects (improvements and equipment) in the amount of $614,600, the Public Works Building Debt Interfund Loan Repayment Levy for $110,000, Rogers Activity Center Special Fund Levy in the amount of $475,000, and the Tax Abatement Levy of $90,000 (formerly included with and considered a special levy). The City has enacted certain special levies for payable 2014 of $634,254 for Debt Service."

Wieland stated the budget document has been taken apart and discussed by council at five budget workshops. We have discussed line item budgets, enterprise budgets, personnel services budgets, levy to tax payers and also reviewed the financial management plan.

Wieland asked if there were any questions for her before opening the meeting for public comment. After public comment, Wieland asked that the Council first approve the levy and second approve the budget.

Bunting clarified that it is not a public hearing, but that public comments will be taken.

Mayor Bunting opened the meeting for public comment at 8:25 p.m.

Jim Kelly 12425 Kelly LaneMr. Kelly spoke on the increase of 5%. Kelly stated we should be getting this down to something reasonable. Mr. Kelly stated if we were working on budgets for our own household, we would expect an increase of 2 -3%. We would need to take off another $200,000 to $300,000. Kelly asked Council to set a limit that makes sense and then set a priority list stating there are some things you can have and some you can't. Kelly asked to cut it down to 2% instead of 5%.

Gregg PeppinPeppin asked Wieland to clarify the increase to the budget versus the increase to the levy. Wieland provided clarification.

Peppin spoke on the RAC and asked if $475,000 is being levied to fund the RAC. Peppin asked for the operating costs and asked what the users of the RAC are paying. Wieland provided a detailed explanation on the budgeted revenues. Peppin stated roughly 50% of the RAC is paid for by tax payers; to be blunt tax payers are paying for a lot of kids to play hockey.

Wieland then provided an explanation on the interfund loan repayment and debt service payments which are also paid out of the same fund. There are debt components in addition to just the operating costs of the building.

Peppin asked if staff envisions the level of $475,000 to continue. Wieland stated she cannot answer for the Council, but stated the interfund loan goes to 2020. Peppin asked that the City do a better job in the charging of user fees.

Bunting stated at the workshop prior to the meeting, this was discussed. Bunting stated both he and Jakel commented that the users of the facility should be paying for a large part of the expense.

Peppin noted city is getting LGA. He stated he hopes the City is not being depended upon by the State. He stated he hopes it is looked at as a way to reduce taxes

Wieland stated LGA is being used to offset the police department debt. Wieland stated LGA is guaranteed for three years. Wieland spoke on committees that she sits on stating the state is trying to restore LGA.

Peppin asked Stahmer to give an explanation on sinking funds. Peppin asked for the City's philosophy on why to tax for it now, to be put away in a savings on something that might be spent later.

Stahmer stated the primary concern for the City is the long term financial health of the City and doing things in a cost efficient way for the long term. Prior to this, there were no funds being put away for the purchase of capital equipment. Stahmer discussed the IT capital fund that started over two years ago. We will never get to the point where we can pay cash for everything, but getting away from borrowing for every piece of equipment and paying for bonding and borrowing fees.

Peppin asked for the amount in all sinking funds. Wieland provided her philosophy of the establishment of the funds and provided detail on the nine sinking funds and the amount in each fund.

Peppin asked for clarification on the $814,000 was shown in the budget document. Wieland stated the difference is the public works interfund loan repayment.

Peppin stated he appreciates the distinction between bonding versus paying cash. Rogers is our homes, I don't have a problem with my daughters paying for the needs that Rogers needs down the road. Fair to spread the cost of that good over future generations. Right now there are great rates for bonding. I urge the Council to think about the multiple sinking funds and how much we want to tax and how much we want to put into these funds and versus giving that money back to the tax payers. We have a young City and they are financially strapped.

Peppin commented on LGA coming in, the sales tax exemption, and increase market values of 1.34% which is generally a built in tax increase for the City. You didn't talk about the municipal liquor store. Where are we at with the budget for 2014 for the municipal liquor store; on and off sale? Are they self-sufficient or does the levy include some to pay for it.

Wieland stated just the opposite; $200,000 is transferred annually. $217,000 to $219,000 is pulled out of liquor and put into general fund to reduce taxes.

Peppin asked how Rogers compares to other municipal operations for cities of our size.

Buysse stated our net profit is also 11%; puts us in top percentage for all other stores in the state.

Peppin stated before he moved to Rogers he lived in Brooklyn Center and attended the truth in taxation meetings there. In Brooklyn Center they put together a financial advisory commission. They solicited people to serve on the commission, specifically asked malcontents like me to service on the committee. The City had 12 advocates that went out on their behalf. Asked the Council to think about that. We don't have a staff of professionals like the City does to be able to translate this stuff for us. 5.51% folks is out of control. I would respectfully submit that it is twice as much as it should be given where we are at in this economy.

Marilyn Brick, 23976 Rivers Edge RoadMy neighbors and I are here tonight because we saw a big increase in taxes. The biggest increase is the City on the form. It is concerning to us, many of whom are retired and living on fixed incomes. My income is not increasing. We are here to know why and how that can change. Also, we live on a private road and we are responsible for maintaining that road. That means the tax payers are not responsible for the plowing and maintaining of the road. But that doesn't change our increase in taxes.

Bunting spoke on the cost of fixing and maintain roads. Bunting stated living on a private road is a personal choice.

Seifert spoke on private streets stated in the planning process they get higher density, they are not built to city standard, and they are all private property with no dedication of road right-of-way.

Bunting stated he has lived here since 2001. Last year there was a sizable decrease in the taxable market value. In general home prices have gone down and have not rebounded from 2006. Bunting stated this tax rate is about the equivalent of about $4 to $4.50 per month. This is for an average home with average increase.

Bunting spoke on the taxes that are paid by commercial businesses in addition to the residential taxes. Bunting stated his goal is to have a long-term view and he is not going to sacrifice safety, good roads, public safety for the sake of saving little bit of money. At the same time continue to look at ways to save money; such as the police department and saving money by purchasing an existing building.

Stahmer added 5.8% is due to an increase in the levy and rate, the remainder of the increase is due to the taxable market value increase in the homes.

Chuck VanHeel, 13375 John Milless DriveChuck stated he is representing Vantage Point Properties. He also introduced his business manager Mike Colossimo. He stated he spoke with the County Assessors and stated the statements that he received are incorrect. He referenced properties that are receiving a 9 – 11% increase. He is asking how to start the process and who can he review the numbers with. It's the City portion of the taxes that we have an issue with.

There was a discussion between VanHeel and staff regarding the values; VanHeel stated the values are flat. VanHeel stated there is something wrong with the City's math on the statements. Stahmer explained the City doesn't give the individual numbers to the County; the County generates the statements.

There was continued discussion on the statements he received and the value increases on the property. Staff offered to sit with them and go through the statements.

Bunting stated a good place to start would be to sit and go through the statements with staff.

Wieland asked for PID numbers in advance of a meeting.

There were no other persons who addressed the Council.

Ihli moved, Hall seconded a motion to close the public comment portion at 9:04 p.m. Motion carried 5-0.

Ihli moved, Hall seconded a motion to adopt Resolution 2013-86.

Bunting stated when he looks at how the City is doing, the best way is to compare us with like cities. We don't operate in a vacuum, we have unique things going on, but still the best way to view how we are doing. There are issues he would like to change. The ice arena is a burden on the city but water over the dam. It is a good asset, but it doesn't change the fact that it is a financial burden. There are things that cities do that don't necessarily break even. As long as he is Mayor, he will continue to look at the city he lives in and compare it to other like cities. Bunting also spoke on fiscal disparities which makes our taxes 20% higher than it should be. Even with fiscal disparities, we are still lower than the cities around us. The financing in this City have been managed fairly effectively. There are no hockey sticks with our rate, we are fairly stable. Our staff has done a fantastic job in making do with less than what a lot of cities get. Bunting commented on our police department being overworked and stated we are doing way more with far less than most.

Bunting stated he wants to take this time to thank staff for their incredibly hard work without the resources that others get; and the police for doing it in a building that he wouldn't work in.

Jakel commented on staff doing a nice job. We have done a lot. Jakel commented on the financial management plan; something that wasn't in place years ago. Jakel stated people come here for quality of life. Jakel commented on where the City has come since he moved in in the late 1990's. Jakel commented on sinking funds and planning for tomorrow. Jakel stated he would like to see more into sinking funds for pavement management. We have had a lot of meetings, and a lot of planning, and we are responsibly moving forward.

Stanley stated we have met a lot, there is nothing frivolous in this budget. It has been carefully planned and carefully looked at.

Bunting restated the motion by Ihli, seconded by Hall to adopt Resolution No. 2013-86, A Resolution Setting the 2014 General and Special Levies (General Levy $5,615,781 and Special Levies $634,254 for a total 2014 tax levy of $6,250,035). Motion carried 5-0.

7.03 Approval of 2014 Liquor Liability InsuranceLiquor Operations Manager Buysse addressed the Council regarding liquor liability insurance for 2014. Buysse provided a history of rates and gave an explanation on the quotes received and what each company that provided a quote is rated.

Hall asked what was paid last year. Buysse stated $16,427.

Hall stated we are looking at three times the amount of the low bidder and commented on getting reinsurance.

This led to a discussion on reinsurance and the insurance rating the low bidder received. Also discussed was the time constraints in needing to renew insurance by year end.

Scharber stated in the first closed session staff was given direction on how to proceed with union negotiations for the sergeant's unit.

Carson stated in the second closed session, Council and staff discussed the County Road 144/Highway 101 right-of-way, the theory of going back to court, and the direction to give the condemnation attorney about the appeal that has been made. Carson stated that message will be given to the attorney tomorrow.